Personlig aftale med fotografen er påkrævet for brug af foto
Art
Amerikansk Fløjlsand (Melanitta deglandi) White-winged Scoter -
Sjældenhed: SU
Stemmer kan høres her (eksternt link)
Lokalitet:
Lille Strandvej, Blåvand - Danmark
En oversigt over forekomsten af sjældne arter i Danmark findes her
2013-02-16
Fotograf: Vincent Legrand - Se profil

Titel: 1st <i>deglandi</i> for Denmark

Beskrivelse: 1867,3 km to tick this Mega from Brussels. This drake was at around 150m far from the beach among a mixed group of Velvet & Common Scoter and Common Eider. Here on this picture we can easly see how head shape are different between Velvet and White-winged Scoter. More than jiiz, this drake displaying with a female Common Scoter...

Uploadet 2013-02-16 Publiceret 2013-02-16 Melanitta deglandi deglandi White-winged Scoter
22 6849
Kommentarer
Carl Christian Tofte
17. feb. 2013 kl. 11:53
this is the picture that says it all - it shows how truly different these two scoter species really are incl. the differences in head- and bill shape. Shots like this one are so much more interesting than any "perfect" portrait of any species of bird.
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
17. feb. 2013 kl. 13:24
For my part I dont mind as good pics as possible. Im sure the photographer also didnt mind the deglandi at closer range :) Always great the photographers try to reach the peak. Actually I often wonder why unsharp socalled ID pics are so admired...
Peter Sunesen
17. feb. 2013 kl. 14:57
Michael, +1
Lars Jensen
17. feb. 2013 kl. 19:53
Perhaps it is easier to see the jizz when the image is not so detailed.
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
17. feb. 2013 kl. 20:18
Jeg forstår godt hvad Calle mener! og jeg er ganske sikker på at Calle også forstår hvad jeg mener. Det er ikke en provokation fra min side endsige krigserklæring, men blot en kommentar om at ID-billeder kvalitetsmæssigt ikke altid behøver at holde laveste fællesnævner. Der er ingen feltornitologer som (jeg kender og arbejder sammen med)som smører leverpostej på deres kikkert linse, blot for at opnå en vis uskarphed :)Mange investerer formuer i god kikkertoptik, og årsagen er selvfølgelig at opnå det bedste kig på fuglen (sjælden eller ej. jeg synes ikke nødvendigvis en fugls jizz fremstår bedre i et uskarpt eller rystet billede Det samme gælder fotografer - et aldeles glimrende kamera med langttrækkende optik kan fåes for under 3000 DKK, og hvis fotografen anstrenger sig for at opnå det bedst mulige billede, er der sjældent undskyldning for et uskarpt og rystet billede. Det er trættende at se snesevis af uskarpe "ID-billeder" og især at fornemme, at fotografen tillige rynker på næsen af alle de "perfekte" billeder der uploades. Jeg kan godt li ID-billeder, både skarpe og uskarpe hvis der er essens i skidtet, men der er voldsomt mange billeder i Galleriet, som bærer præg sjusk. Vincents billede er absolut interessant og brugbart, men jeg ved også at Vincent er en dygtig fotograf som i andre sammenhæng uploader super billeder af en helt anden kaliber. Mvh Michael
Troels Eske Ortvad
17. feb. 2013 kl. 21:13
Hej Michael og Peter Som jeg ser det, er det endelig lykkedes en dygtig fotograf/birder, at tage et godt billede af fuglen. Jeg stod selv lige ved siden af Vincent Legrand og fedtede med mit lommekamera og 40-50 gange zoom på scopet, men kunne ikke tage et billede, som kom i nærheden af hans! Han forsøgte sig også med en lang telelinse men resultatet blev tilsyneladende bedst med et lille normalobjektiv på hans spejlreflekskamera sat til swarovski-scopet. Anden lå i øvrigt unormalt tæt på kysten i går, hvilket jeg har en formodning om skyldtes det overskyede vejr. Jeg har selv forsøgt, at fotodokumentere fuglen i dagevis, og endnu et af mine super-dogme fotos fra i går ligger på Blåvandswebben til skræk og advarsel:-). I øvrigt, er jeg ligesom Carl Christian ret glad for dogmefotos, da de jo fortæller mere om hvordan fuglene tager sig ud når man finder dem på afstand, end close-ups. Som sagt, så lægger man her mærke til hovedformen, og forfalder ikke så let til en analyse af små detaljer, som nærmest er umulige, at se i felten alligevel. Og close-ups kan næsten blive for meget af det gode nogen gange syntes jeg;-). Dermed selvfølgelig ikke sagt, at close-ups nødvendigvis er kedelige, bestemt ikke! Billederne på nettet har jo i øvrigt udviklet sig til en helt uundværlig reference. Bedste hilsen, Troels
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
18. feb. 2013 kl. 02:08
Jeg er ikke uenig TEO :) Mener blot at ID af en fugl via dogmefoto ikke er bedre end et billede af høj kvalitet. Er bestemt ikke modstander af dogmefotos såfremt andet ikke kan fremskaffes. Synes blot at "dogmefotos" nogle gange kan blive for meget af det dårlige. Bedste hilsner Michael
Klaus Malling Olsen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 10:38
Netfugl har et bredt sigte og en stor brugergruppe. Det, den ene fraktion sætter pris på, kan lade den anden fraktion kold. Den enkelte brugers mening er næppe særlig interessant for andre end afsenderen selv. Når dette er sagt så er det et godt og pædagogisk uslåeligt foto af en raritet, man skal være heldig for blot at få at se. Feltornitologerne kan kun være taknemmelige over, at der er plads til fotos af den kaliber på Netfugl, og at de værdsættes af en stor flade af brugere.
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 15:21
Der er vist ingen der benægter at ID fotos, og billeder af rariteter er velkomne og vedkomne på Netfugl. Men tilsyneladende er KMOs mening om dette vældig intetessant.
Vincent Legrand
19. feb. 2013 kl. 16:04
Ouaiiis c'est bien vrai tt ça, mais bon je pige plus grand chose là...
Klaus Malling Olsen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 16:28
Dear Vincent The discussion in Danish dealed with slightly different opinions about the value of "documentary photoes" versus more tecknical perfect photoes. I think all are most grateful to you for publishing this amazing impression of a bird which has proved very hard to get good views of. It seems like you and other visiting birders from abroad chosed the best day for getting the bird.
Jan Jörgensen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 17:32
Shots like the one here by Vincent (and indeed other shots here on Netfugl)are of great value - simply due to the fact that it is a rarity and because the photographer was unable to get any closer. The main point in cases like this is the possibility of being able to identify the bird. The subject pic, however, doesn´t in my opinion strictly fall under the so called 'doc pic'- it´s better. Of course we all prefer pin sharp pic, and as such Netfugl is full of those - what a joy!
Carl Christian Tofte
19. feb. 2013 kl. 18:58
I admit that my remark was also polemic, but it also derives from the fact, that I, as a bird painter, work on a daily basis with the problems it involves to depict a bird in a way that gets the information you want to deliver through to the receiver. I am right now preparing my yearly exhibition wich I have at home in Pulken, Skåne, where the all dominating subject is the crane. Cranes roost here in the thousands, up to 7200 have been counted, between 20 march and 15 april, and apart from exhibiting my art, I also put down a great deal of work in telling visitors about the birds behavior, where they come from, and where they are going. This year I am working on a brochure, where the "language" of the cranes is explained and all the time I find myself painting feather details and variations in bill colorastion. Shortly I seem to be paying too much attention to details wich are indifferent to the understanding of crane behavior and seeing a photograph like this one gets me back on the right track. Here I would like to draw the attention to one great bird illustrator, who strived to simplify his way of communication: Roger Tory Peterson. He always strived to make bird identification as straight forward as possible and for this purpose he worked deliberatly with the eviction of information, wich he thought would only blur the picture. E.g. the first issues of his field guide to north american birds (I guess it was called Eastern Birds) were in black and white. It was only with great reluctance that he agreed to let the book print in color, because he was not sure if even this would only make matters look more confusing. The thing is, that a photographer or bird illustrator may well fall in love with her motive in a way that removes her attention from the core subject-matter - anyways if the subject-matter is to facilitate and inspire bird identification. And that is exactly what I want with (parts of) my work as a bird artist/illustrator. Further this is, in my opinion, also what should be the subject-matter for a web-site as netfugl. What I, as a field ornithologist, want to see more of is photographs like this one by Vincent Legrand, a photograph wich due to being slightly out of focus, draws attention to the key field marks of two similar species. What I don't want to see is more perfect pygmyowls photographed at unknown localities.
Peter Sunesen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 19:19
".... draws attention to the key field marks of two similar species. What I don't want to see is more perfect pygmyowls photographed at unknown localities." Dear Carl Christian, IMO there is much more to truly understanding the essential characteristics of each species than merely "the key field marks" In my profession as an ornithological taxidermist, I have at times asked top-birders for constructive critique of my work, but have rarely received any useful feedback. Why? Could it be because top-birders have a tendency to focus solely on the identifying marks between species, and thus miss the more hard-to-define 'general picture' or 'heart and soul' of each species. Surely photos of "perfect Pygmy Owls" can only help us getting even closer to such an all-encompassing insight? Even whether the locality of the photograph is unknown or not....just my penny:-) Peter
Helge Sørensen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 19:54
- looks like I should change my lens with a used beer-bottle, it will surely get the much appreciated "slightly out of focus" quality. Anybody wants to buy a slightly used 500mm tele.... I think it comes down to this - some like to be able to ID a rare bird and get a "X", but don't care much about the bird itself - others actually like birds and therefore enjoy good photos of them. On Netfugl I think there are more of the first category - just look at how much more interest a docu shot of a rarity in Denmark gets, compared to a quality image from the birds natural range. BTW - good job Vincent, - of getting a much better photo than any of the Danes have managed so far.... IMO Vincent's image is an important and very relevant record-shot, whereas the many low quality photos (of common birds) primarily is the photographers way to say "look I was also there" , just like when 15 persons enter the same record in DOF-basen. Those photos I would like to be without... Helge
Carl Christian Tofte
19. feb. 2013 kl. 20:11
I am thorougly confused. Did I not mention my own tendency to focus on perfect detail, and the flaws in communication that this may lead to? If anyone should not know, I am the one who is not interested in an'X, but in getting as close to the understanding of the real appearence of any bird. As late as yesterday I discovered the very appearent white mark on the front wing of male and female mallard, totally new to me due to shere lazyness. What I am talking about above is communication but also the status of field ornithology - both "as such" and on Netfugl, where I have to state, that the field ornithological approach is deteriorating.. I should be the last person to not thank Helge Sørensen for his splendid work. Somtimes what I need is to scrutinise the coloration of the primaries of a young eleonoras falcon so please take your empty bottles to the supermarket and keep the lens!
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
19. feb. 2013 kl. 21:24
Indrømmet blev jeg lidt irriteret over KMOs belærende og "besserwissen" ved mine kommentarer i ovenstående og nylige indlæg, men som han skriver har vi alle forskellige synsvinkler. Selv om dette ikke interesserer KMO, kan jeg for min egen fotograferings vedkommende fortælle, at det for 99% vedkommende primært er for dokumentations vedkommende, men at jeg lægger mange kræfter og anstrengelser i at gøre det så godt som overhovedet muligt. Derfor min kommentarer om at sætter overliggeren lidt højere. Mvh Michael
Per Smith
19. feb. 2013 kl. 23:34
Alle generaliseringer er farlige - især denne.
Troels Eske Ortvad
20. feb. 2013 kl. 01:18
Thanks a lot Vincent for sharing the picture, - the first to show the birds in detail! Peter wrote "Could it be because top-birders have a tendency to focus solely on the identifying marks between species, and thus miss the more hard-to-define 'general picture' or 'heart and soul' of each species." For my part, as a birder, I first and foremost focus on how to identify the birds. Thus, any fieldmark are of great interest to me which is why I greatly appreciate the work of the photographers here on Netfugl. But, I must confess that the focus on rarities often leaves little time to fully appreciate the peculiarities of the common birds. Perhaps this is why birders so deeply enjoy the work of great artists like yourself and Carl Christian to remind us of what we miss out on, and also value the verbal versions of KMO and his colleagues. Still, while searching for the rarity, the jizz is often what tells the odd bird apart, so we can´t be totally oblivious.. And the time we spent scrutinizing a rarity may also leave a rarity-obsessed birder time to fully realize the nature of both the vagrant and the common species. For instance, while observing the deglandi I got to see a lot of different behavior in both the Velvets Scoters and the deglandi, and noticed the differences between the two. For instance, the deglandi more often leans forward with the neck stretched in a so-called Loch Ness-monster-like posture as also described in the young male from Scotland in 2011 at least. Also, the bird in question holds the head lower down at rest compared to the Velvets, and the neck seems to be a little shorter than the Velvets while stretched. As it engages in courtship parties with Velvets it has been observed to hold its head lower above the water when approaching its contestants, and it has been described to be a little bit bigger than the Velvets in flight. Further observations can surely reveal more differences.
Michael Westerbjerg Andersen
20. feb. 2013 kl. 03:08
Inden nogen får grøden galt i halsen: Kmo og jeg kender hinanden gennem mere end 30 år, og ingen sætter spørgsmålstegn ved KMOs pædagogiske og ihærdighed - ihvertfald ikke jeg. Der er heller intet ondt ment, irritation er ikke nødvendigvis farligt, og både KMO og jeg er forbilledlige diplomater... Vincent - its a great pic. Really appreciated. Beklager lidt tekstmæssige svipsere; skriver fra smartass phone. Michael
Carsten Murmann
20. feb. 2013 kl. 15:30
Thanks, Vincent, for a new profile in the Danish seascape. Kæmpehoved nedsænket ved kort, lav ryg. Kaptajn Nemo el. Mefisto med hvid øje-skråstreg, der dukker op fra dybet i sort fløjl? En orlogsmand med fremskudt rampe/fladt fordæk, som i car design fortsat bagtil i skrogets overlinje? Smile ,,,,,,,,, C.
Carl Christian Tofte
21. feb. 2013 kl. 21:32
Thanks, TEO for sharing your precise observations on the behavior, jizz etc. I re-read the article about black scoter in Frontiers in Birding recently, and was really inspired by the way in wich attention was payed to a drake black scoter resting with common scoters, wich was observed to leave the group heading for the surf, where it would forage alone. Your observations show the same degree of awareness to detail, a way of observing birds that one often forgets after a lucky twitch, where the mere joy of the fact of "getting the bird" often distracts ones attention from learning and improving ones skills.

Log ind her for at kommentere fotoet. Er du ikke oprettet som bruger kan du oprette dig som bruger her.

Annoncer